Bend but don't break approach

[rodell330]

Look The world knows our defense sucks...especially our pass defense. I'm willing to accept the bend, but don't break mentality at this point. If teams are going to torch us through the air? Done it... I just hope that once they get into the red zone where there are smaller areas and less room...that we can hold them to 3 pts instead of 7.

After watching these guy perform, on top of hearing all the talking heads speak about how our defense is A concern.. I'm convinced there's very little hope they can all of a sudden become world beaters. All I ask is that they find a way to get Rodgers and the offense more possessions. The longer they are on the sidelines the better. Dallas was finally able to slow Stafford down in the second half when they started to blitz him and forced him to rush his throws. Hopefully Capers watched the game.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Isnt this what the defense did this week. 13 points is what they gave up until the game was so out of hand it didn't matter. It wasn't pretty that was precisely bend but don't break. Minnesota was held to two fgs and then got the one huge td.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Look The world knows our defense sucks...especially our pass defense. I'm willing to accept the bend, but don't break mentality at this point. If teams are going to torch us through the air? Done it... I just hope that once they get into the red zone where there are smaller areas and less room...that we can hold them to 3 pts instead of 7.

After watching these guy perform, on top of hearing all the talking heads speak about how our defense is A concern.. I'm convinced there's very little hope they can all of a sudden become world beaters. All I ask is that they find a way to get Rodgers and the offense more possessions. The longer they are on the sidelines the better. Dallas was finally able to slow Stafford down in the second half when they started to blitz him and forced him to rush his throws. Hopefully Capers watched the game.

I feel you may be a little harsh. Our defense is "ok". Our pass rush is good, but the D Backs are obviously very much in question. Hopefully they can hold it together to pull out the victory.

 

[rodell330]

Isnt this what the defense did this week. 13 points is what they gave up until the game was so out of hand it didn't matter. It wasn't pretty that was precisely bend but don't break. Minnesota was held to two fgs and then got the one huge td.

This is true...but at the same time it was the Queens...their offense had been struggling to even move the ball prior to our game. That is definitely cause for concern.

 

[rodell330]

I feel you may be a little harsh. Our defense is "ok". Our pass rush is good, but the D Backs are obviously very much in question. Hopefully they can hold it together to pull out the victory.

You may be the first person I've heard in a long time call this defense "ok". I guess average would mean "ok" to you? ..the thing is they are just a tad below average imo. If they had at least one corner who could cover I'd be willing to call them "ok"...but they don't. Giving up all those yards to no name WRs, and blowing big leads isn't being to harsh at all. Those are facts.

 

[Sanguine camper]

Bend but don't break is an excuse for poor defenses. Those defenses break when they face a team with a good o line that can run or faces a team with an elite qb with a good TE. Those teams don't kick many field goals. If bend but dont break is your hope you are in big trouble.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

It would be nice if the coaching staff would actually make a commitment to Ty and the running game. I know everyone is super pumped that the Packers scored so much against the Vikings but let's remember that most of those points came in the second half, when the Vikings corners decided to ignore the gameplan. It would have been nice for the coaching staff to stick the running game to keep the defense off the field (remember, the offense only scored 10 points in the second half so the "but what they were doing was working" argument doesn't work) but, yet again, MM shows that he has no clue how to use Ty. The guy ran for 162 yards last week and, as an encore, let's give him 9 carries.

What worries me is that this is a pattern for MM. He lucks into a tremendous game from Ty and then, when he has other options, he ignores him. When the Packers need to play the Falcons in the playoffs, an established run game would be VERY helpful in keeping one of the more potent offenses in NFL history off the field....but instead the Packers will throw it a lot and then people will complain that the Packer's defense couldn't stop one of the best offenses of all-time and ignore games like this one against the Vikings, where the Packers had a chance to get their running game going and decided not to.

 

[XPack]

Matthews is back, right? That should help a lot imo.

 

[rodell330]

Bend but don't break is an excuse for poor defenses. Those defenses break when they face a team with a good o line that can run or faces a team with an elite qb with a good TE. Those teams don't kick many field goals. If bend but dont break is your hope you are in big trouble.

It's my glimmer of hope bro. If they allow teams to drive down the field on them (which is very possible) ...but by Gods grace allow only 3 pts in the process? That's a win for us trust me.

 

[rodell330]

Matthews is back, right? That should help a lot imo.

Hopefully what we saw Sunday was more Matthews being the Matthews of old...and not due to the Queens poor o line play.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

You may be the first person I've heard in a long time call this defense "ok". I guess average would mean "ok" to you? ..the thing is they are just a tad below average imo. If they had at least one corner who could cover I'd be willing to call them "ok"...but they don't. Giving up all those yards to no name WRs, and blowing big leads isn't being to harsh at all. Those are facts.

I'm glad you agree with me.

 

[swhitset]

It would be nice if the coaching staff would actually make a commitment to Ty and the running game. I know everyone is super pumped that the Packers scored so much against the Vikings but let's remember that most of those points came in the second half, when the Vikings corners decided to ignore the gameplan. It would have been nice for the coaching staff to stick the running game to keep the defense off the field (remember, the offense only scored 10 points in the second half .......to.

What??? The Packers scored 28 points in the first half ... and the Vikings corners ignored the game plan in the first half .... apparently not the second.....

 

[rodell330]

I'm glad you agree with me.

Yup. My apple did taste like an orange this morning.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It would be nice if the coaching staff would actually make a commitment to Ty and the running game. I know everyone is super pumped that the Packers scored so much against the Vikings but let's remember that most of those points came in the second half, when the Vikings corners decided to ignore the gameplan. It would have been nice for the coaching staff to stick the running game to keep the defense off the field (remember, the offense only scored 10 points in the second half so the "but what they were doing was working" argument doesn't work) but, yet again, MM shows that he has no clue how to use Ty. The guy ran for 162 yards last week and, as an encore, let's give him 9 carries.

What worries me is that this is a pattern for MM. He lucks into a tremendous game from Ty and then, when he has other options, he ignores him. When the Packers need to play the Falcons in the playoffs, an established run game would be VERY helpful in keeping one of the more potent offenses in NFL history off the field....but instead the Packers will throw it a lot and then people will complain that the Packer's defense couldn't stop one of the best offenses of all-time and ignore games like this one against the Vikings, where the Packers had a chance to get their running game going and decided not to.

I think we were watching a different game? Swhitset already covered the scoring in first half VS. second half. But as far as the running game goes, how long do you stick to "establishing the running game"? The Vikings were playing the run and it showed, Ty had 23 yards on 9 carries.....for a James Starks like average of 2.6 yards. Why would you hitch your wagons to that with the kind of game AR was having slicing up the Vikings secondary?

Not sure why you are criticizing MM for realizing the run game wasn't there, but the passing game was and exploited that to get out to a 38-13 lead. Would you have prefered sticking to the run and grinding out a 14-13 lead?

A running game is nice, but I think some fans get too enamoured with it. If you have AR at QB and he is carving up a defense like he was on Saturday, you take the scores while they are there. Sure, your defense is on the field more, but sometimes you have to have faith in them, as well as get lucky with a few turnovers and at the end of the day, outscore them just like we did Saturday.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

..........good, we agree on that as well, you need to see a doctor.

 

[rodell330]

..........good, we agree on that as well, you need to see a doctor.

Apparently an eye doctor... as you see a completely different defense out there than I do.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

You just want to split hairs. I said the run D is "ok" (not good) and obviously the D backs are in question (questionable at best). I don't see a COMPLETELY different defense than you do. NOW, what do you want to argue about?

 

[rodell330]

You just want to split hairs. I said the run D is "ok" (not good) and obviously the D backs are in question (questionable at best). I don't see a COMPLETELY different defense than you do. NOW, what do you want to argue about?

I'm doing neither. Good day sir.

 

[Bluegrass79]

Of the teams right now in playoff position the Packers are the #1 team overall in Sacks.
The Packers are also #1 in defense interceptions amongst the playoff teams.
#1 in sacks #1 in interceptions.

Moral of the story:
The defense is good enough if they can get pressure on the qb. Clay must be 100%. Pressure leads to INT's. Just get off to a good start offensively and acquire the lead. Control the clock. Don't FUMBLE cuz teams like Dallas live off fumbles this year. Look for the pressure to produce INT's.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/defense/sort/sacks
http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/defense/sort/interceptions

 

[Sunshinepacker]

What??? The Packers scored 28 points in the first half ... and the Vikings corners ignored the game plan in the first half .... apparently not the second.....

Actually yeah, if you read the stories the corners didn't follow the gameplan. Rhodes was supposed to follow Jordy on either side but the corners ignored that and stayed on their respective sides. It wasn't until the second half that Rhodes began shadowing Jordy. However, I did enjoy your misplaced outrage.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...-plan-covering-jordy-nelson-green-bay-packers

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I think we were watching a different game? Swhitset already covered the scoring in first half VS. second half. But as far as the running game goes, how long do you stick to "establishing the running game"? The Vikings were playing the run and it showed, Ty had 23 yards on 9 carries.....for a James Starks like average of 2.6 yards. Why would you hitch your wagons to that with the kind of game AR was having slicing up the Vikings secondary?

Not sure why you are criticizing MM for realizing the run game wasn't there, but the passing game was and exploited that to get out to a 38-13 lead. Would you have prefered sticking to the run and grinding out a 14-13 lead?

A running game is nice, but I think some fans get too enamoured with it. If you have AR at QB and he is carving up a defense like he was on Saturday, you take the scores while they are there. Sure, your defense is on the field more, but sometimes you have to have faith in them, as well as get lucky with a few turnovers and at the end of the day, outscore them just like we did Saturday.

I'm criticizing MM for his history of abandoning the run. You really think 9 carries is trying to establish the run?! Or was it the four carries he gave Michael that put the team over the top?

And as I pointed out, Rodgers did most of his damage in the first half, when the Vikings' corners ignored the gameplan that Zimmer had. Once the corners actually started doing what they were supposed to (that is, having Rhodes shadow Jordy) the Packers offense stopped lighting it up and the game got a LOT closer.

 

[Wildcatk23]

Lol? Idk what you are Trying to say ? We scored 28 points in the first half ? You really confused me .

It would be nice if the coaching staff would actually make a commitment to Ty and the running game. I know everyone is super pumped that the Packers scored so much against the Vikings but let's remember that most of those points came in the second half, when the Vikings corners decided to ignore the gameplan. It would have been nice for the coaching staff to stick the running game to keep the defense off the field (remember, the offense only scored 10 points in the second half so the "but what they were doing was working" argument doesn't work) but, yet again, MM shows that he has no clue how to use Ty. The guy ran for 162 yards last week and, as an encore, let's give him 9 carries.

What worries me is that this is a pattern for MM. He lucks into a tremendous game from Ty and then, when he has other options, he ignores him. When the Packers need to play the Falcons in the playoffs, an established run game would be VERY helpful in keeping one of the more potent offenses in NFL history off the field....but instead the Packers will throw it a lot and then people will complain that the Packer's defense couldn't stop one of the best offenses of all-time and ignore games like this one against the Vikings, where the Packers had a chance to get their running game going and decided not to.

 

[bigbubbatd]

What??? The Packers scored 28 points in the first half ... and the Vikings corners ignored the game plan in the first half .... apparently not the second.....

Depending on who you believe the Vikings players ignored the game plan on 1 to 3 drives in the first half. Some say it was just the first when the Packers didn't score.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Bend but don't break is an excuse for poor defenses. Those defenses break when they face a team with a good o line that can run or faces a team with an elite qb with a good TE. Those teams don't kick many field goals. If bend but dont break is your hope you are in big trouble.

Dallas Atlanta Green Bay and Detroit all give up 5.5 yards per play or more ranking all of them in the bottom half of the league. Only the Giants and Seahawks have good defenses among the current NFC playoff teams. The Packers may have the worst but there are quite a few bad defenses.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Lol? Idk what you are Trying to say ? We scored 28 points in the first half ? You really confused me .

How is that confusing? The Packers scored 28 points in the first half of the game. Nelson TD reception and Adams TD reception in first quarter, another Nelson TD catch and a Rodgers TD run in the second quarter.

Does that unconfuse the issue?